Walking into the video room on any given weekend, you'll hear something like “Standby 1, take 1, check your focus 3, take 3, CG you're clear,” and so on. Our video room is in the basement - not directly under the stage, but close to it. It's a room where the only connection to the service is via speakers on the wall and the camera feeds on the monitors. This room has quite a responsibility though: creating an environment for several different groups of people. For us, there are congregants watching live in the auditorium who like seeing the larger-than-life image of the pastor via IMAG; then there are those who solely rely on video for their experience - our satellite campuses, video venue, and live stream. There is a lot of responsibility lying on one person's shoulders. The video director is in charge of making sure every screen in our church displays our services accurately and portrays the message we're trying to get across. The one glaring variable, though, is how the weekend video director's personal style changes the way someone experiences the service.

I have gone back and forth, trying to figure out where I stand when it comes to directing video. I want to remain neutral and give credit to all styles, but I also realize that being Switzerland here doesn't help anyone. My opinion on the present topic is ever-evolving, and this article projects where I am on the subject at this point in time.

Being the production director for my church, I don't actually direct video each weekend, I lead the team that does, and I experience the outcome. Throughout the week, I watch a lot of church services, either by streaming or on demand. I feel I have seen it all: from the single-camera, locked -down shot on the local cable access channel, to the high-energy quick cuts of handheld stage cameras at the mega churches. There is a time and a place for all styles, and knowing when to use them at the right moment is what makes for great video.

...live video is essentially a living, breathing thing.

Find some examples of other churches who you enjoy watching, and see how they're directing. In this case, stealing ideas and styles is not a punishable offense, it's a way of improving your technique.

Several weeks ago, a church I greatly admire and respect performed the same worship song for their weekend services, as we did. I created a side-by-side of their Vimeo video and our IMAG, then invited my whole team in to watch it. Our styles were quite different: while we pushed, pulled, and never stopped moving; they remained relatively still. I felt their approach enhanced the song, while ours detracted from it.

I think we've become a society afraid of silence or stillness. Blame Sesame Street and their short segments for kids if you want, but our society's attention span is dwindling. It can be painful for some to hold a single camera shot for too long (myself included). We counteract this by constantly staying in motion.

The key is to add to the experience of those in the audience. It is not the main attraction.

A few days prior to writing this piece, my church held a night of worship. Since I've been trying to pin down a specific video style that I prefer --- how much motion I can tolerate, and so on --- I purposefully paid very close attention to how our video director approached this unique evening service. I found myself enthralled with the worship because of the video directing. It drew me in, and I realized that live video is essentially a living, breathing thing. It can't be contained to a single style while retaining its effectiveness.

In order to keep your congregation interested and enthralled, you need to embrace different styles to match the context of worship. If you have only one trick up your sleeve, and you'll fail to be efficient in your message. It's imperative to create some sort of rhythm to compliment the action on stage, and not steal the “show.” When the band starts the service with an upbeat song, there's nothing wrong with using quick cuts to add energy to the room; but as the mood turns more relaxed and reverent, don't be afraid to keep the movement and transitions to a minimum.

Remember, with IMAG, the key is to add to the experience of those in the audience. It is not the main attraction.

Tags

Comments (7)

Remember the roll of A/V/L should be to enhance th...

Remember the roll of A/V/L should be to enhance the worship experience in a manner that those worshiping don't know we are there!!

Author: Edmore than 3 years ago

We are looking at diving into IMAG this year. I've...

We are looking at diving into IMAG this year. I've been putting it off until they could spend real money to do it right. This article really gives me something to think about going into all of it. Thanks for sharing!

Author: Jimmymore than 5 years ago

Very thoughtful. No one style can fit a church, or...

Very thoughtful. No one style can fit a church, or even a single song. Many modern songs change their mood through out the song.The other item to balance is when your church only has one M/E bus that must supply IMAG and the web. You may note that the church you watched MAY have done a 2 M/E switch, and you might be watching the web and not IMAG.Due to my church's screens being a bit small for our sanctuary, I "selectively" engage in IMAG for some parts and not others (i.e. the bulk of worship is full screen CG, specials, the sermon are IMAG). This is a course I suggest many churches starting out take so as not to add the technical complexity of lower thirds and to minimize the distraction of the congregation.

Author: Stuart Mackeymore than 5 years ago

You absolutely correct, I am I am right there with...

You absolutely correct, I am I am right there with you trying to decide what style makes to most sense not just on as song by song basis, but what moves the audience in the direction we want overall, and I don't get it right as often as I would like.

Author: Mark Hannamore than 5 years ago

Thanks for the article Shaun! I agree in many resp...

Thanks for the article Shaun! I agree in many respects with the struggle you expressed and with your reasoning. Looking at Image MAGnification, we are merely magnifying what we observe to be the most important element to be shown at the time with a method that helps to either tell the story or that promotes the subject at hand. Every shot the director takes, he should be able to answer the questions "Why am I showing this?" and "Where am I moving to?" Planning. Thinking ahead. Anticipating. Every transition, while done with an artist's touch (type, duration & frequency), should further aid in moving to/through the story as it unfolds. Many directors get sucked into what's trendy, not understanding the thought processes behind what they are creating; they have to learn first how to present the live story… connecting the dots for the viewers. twitter: @doschaffer

Author: Donmore than 5 years ago

Do the quick cuts help the song's message connect ...

Do the quick cuts help the song's message connect to a younger audience better, or is that just what's required to keep their attention --- or is it the video director showing off?

Author: Nanookmore than 5 years ago

Hyper-active IMAG drives me nuts. The quick cuts,...

Hyper-active IMAG drives me nuts. The quick cuts, pushes, pulls, sweeps, dissolves on EVERY shot….. Maybe I'm just getting old, but sometimes I just have to shut my eyes because it's just too much.